Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Today: the most important case the Supreme Court will handle this year

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 09:49 AM
Original message
Today: the most important case the Supreme Court will handle this year

Today, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case for Guantanamo inmates that ultimately could have far reaching impacts for all Americans. The issue is whether they should enjoy the right of habeas corpus which was denied to them by Congress under the Military Commissions Act of 2006. 'Habeas Corpus' means, essentially, that anyone accused of a crime has the right to hear the legal charges being brought against them, to face their accuser in a court of law, and defend themselves against those charges.

By placing himself literally above the law, Bush has reserved for himself the right to imprison people outside the U.S. and deny them habeas corpus and a fair trial. The Constitution states that "the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it." We are under neither a rebellion or invasion.

This should be interesting given the SCOTUS we have now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Jim__ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
1. The real question is whether or not we still have a constitution.
I don't have much hope, given the current Supreme Court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yourout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 09:54 AM
Response to Original message
2. With Kennedy being the deciding vote there is not much hope.
But we have dry powder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beer Snob-50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
3. bushies will contend that an invasion is possible
with these prisoners free and thus habeas corpus should be suspended. this will stand up with the current supreme court although i have a feeling that kennedy could surprise everyone and vote against the bushies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 10:00 AM
Response to Original message
4. "Enemy combatants" need habeas--but what about us?
Edited on Wed Dec-05-07 10:14 AM by librechik
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Since W can declare you to BE an "Enemy combatant"
at any time he wants.. I'm guessing this is applicable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MikeNearMcChord Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
5. Who does history damns more?
The dictator, or the opposition that sits back and allows the dictator, to do his damage? Unlike Germany in the 30's or Russia in the first part of the 20th century, the opposition Party today has the will and the Constitutional mandate to stop this slide into madness, and G-ddammit they won't!:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 10:18 AM
Response to Original message
6. C Span 3 is supposed to cover, starting 11:15. . . .n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
8. The MCA was written to reverse a Supreme Court decision
Edited on Wed Dec-05-07 10:34 AM by IDemo
in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. While it may seem all that is required is for the SC to reassert its former position, I seem to recall that one of the justices effectively advised that Congress could change the law if it wanted to.

- edit to add:

Justice Breyer's statement

Breyer - ...Congress has denied the President the legislative authority to create military commissions of the kind at issue here. Nothing prevents the President from returning to Congress to seek the authority he believes necessary. ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamdan_v._Rumsfeld
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim__ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Is that the issue that they're hearing today?
Are they hearing a case about military commissions, or is this case about whether or not these prisoners have a right of habeas corpus?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. At issue: whether to overturn Military Commissions Act passed by Congress
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22113362/

The case is about whether to overturn the Military Commissions Act, which took away habeas corpus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
9. kicking, this is an important topic
This is about habeas corpus and executive power, folks. This is the whole shootin' match for a democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC